The comunism not found

This debate never rose above assertions. That said, pro insists all communist countries are poor and are ruled by dictatorships; con brings up an example of Auroville which is neither poor nor a dictatorship yet is apparently communist in spite of that.

I am assuming this is a school assignment, to which I wish you both the best of luck.

I'm not quite sure what the resolution means. Still, Con points to the existence of auroville - whatever that is - and says that it is communist. Pro counters that auroville isn't dictatorial and therefore not communist. Con replies that communism doesn't require a dictatorship. I've got no idea what auroville is, but Pro's only objection to it being communist was that it wasn't a dictatorship. Con countered that. Thus, Con seems to have found communism, so I'll give arguments to him.

Still no idea what was going on here.

Again, having a 2-round debate with each one short arguments is insufficent in deciding anything, and I didn't see anything get decided. 10 thousand characters yet none of them was used to determine what "found" is. Nobody gave a source on what auroville is(No, I don't know what it is). The only source was from Con, which defined what "communism" is, and it is better than nothing, I guess. I just have no clue of what this debate came to be.

I will award the S&G to Con because although both sides have legible writing, Pro literally misspelt "communism" in the title.

I will award the Conduct to Pro because the 2nd round of Pro is just a rebuttal(if you can call it that) and backs up his 1st round argument. Con pretty much gave most of his arguments in R2, where Pro cannot effectively respond(if you can call it that, again). Con stated Auroville was communist but not why in R1, and only told us why in R2. From how normal debates are structured and judged(if it even applies), this is technically bad conduct.

in general, he showed a very limited understanding of what communism is